View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Tasmania Open Access Repository CRIMINOLOGY RESEARCH UNIT Occasional Paper No. 3 June 2006 Food Matters Issues Surrounding Food in Prison by Diane Heckenberg & Dannielle Cody Criminology & Corrections Contact: Professor Rob White Director Criminology Research Unit School of Sociology & Social Work Private Bag 17 Hobart Tasmania Australia 7001 Telephone +61 3 62262877 Facsimile +61 3 62262279 Email [email protected] ISSN 1447-9966 Preface The issue of prison food has made headlines several times over the last few years in Tasmania. It is a problem not unique to this State. As demonstrated in this report, the quality, quantity and social context of food preparation and consump- tion really does matter for prisoners – whether they reside at Risdon prison, a mainland institution or overseas. What you eat and how you eat is enormously important to all of us. In situations of enforced confinement and loss of ordinary freedoms, food becomes even more significant and the issues more pronounced. This report has been undertaken as part of the Field Project component of the Criminology & Corrections post graduate course work program offered by the University of Tasmania. Di and Dannielle drew upon a range of sources of informa- tion about prison food, including relevant literature and interviews with former prisoners. They also had discussions with select prison staff. As a field project report, the study has its limitations, due to time, resource and access constraints. Nevertheless, the report provides a good example of inde- pendent research that can constructively bring to public attention an informed overview of key issues. Indeed, part of the intention in publishing this study as an occasional paper is to provide a ‘benchmark’ document for future reference – something that provides criteria and baseline information that may be useful in any evaluation of prison food issues later down the track. The aim of the Criminology Research Unit is to foster criminology in Tasmania as a field of study, research, evaluation and policy development. The CRU undertakes commissioned work on behalf of government departments and non-government agencies, as well as publishing briefing papers and occasional papers on topics of general public interest. Professor Rob White Director – Criminology Research Unit University of Tasmania 1 CONTENTS Acknowledgement 3 Executive Summary 4 Introduction 7 Realities of Prison Food 12 Special Days & Special Diets 21 Food Poisoning & Kitchen Hygiene 27 The Eating Environment 29 Food, Mood & Prison Morale 34 Towards Best Practice 39 Conclusion 42 References 46 Appendix 49 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT We would like to thank the six men who willingly and candidly shared their experiences of prison food. We are grateful to Prison Advice Referral Information Support Service (PARISS) for their role in facilitating contact with ex-inmates, who met our research criteria. Thanks to Brett Collins, representing Justice Action (JA) in New South Wales for information on the experiences of inmates in that state. We appreciate the contribution of Andrew Hines, Food Services Manager, Risdon Prison, who responded to emailed questions on menu planning, the cook-chill method and the new food service and Ron Vanderwal, Senior Health Environmen- tal Officer from Clarence City Council who contributed to our understanding of health and safety standards and prison kitchen inspections. 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report sets out the findings of semi-structured interviews with six ex-inmates about the place of food in their prison experience. The research shows that despite varying backgrounds, the men shared certain common experiences, opin- ions and perceptions of prison food. Comparisons were drawn with jurisdictions in New South Wales and Victoria, as well as exploring best practice policies and procedures in Northern Ireland and New Zealand. Four key issues emerged : 1. The cook-chill method 2. The eating environment 3. Staff/inmate relations, and 4. Communication Those issues in relation to food and eating that made the mens’ lives particularly difficult include: • The practice of eating in cells • The closure of mess rooms • Eating in dirty overcrowded yards • Food cooked and chilled 48 to 72 hours in advance • A perceived deterioration in the quantity, quality, variety, temperature and presentation of food since introduction of the cook-chill method • Not enough food • Change from metal to plastic cutlery and from plates to foil containers • Replacement of week-day hot lunches with sandwiches • Inadequate and ever-changing canteen list • 15-16 hour gap between dinner and breakfast • Absence of an effective impartial grievance process • Anxiety about hygiene, food poisoning and the validity of unannounced kitchen inspections • Obstructive practices by custodial officers • Special diets poorly catered for • No opportunity to prepare and cook food for themselves • Increased time in cells and yards Key Findings The essential findings of this study are that : • The expectation that inmates will sleep, eat and go to the toilet in the same space is offensive. Cells are not designed for food consumption, given their prox- imity to toilets, and those who share a cell are particularly disadvantaged • The closure of mess rooms and the move to eating in cells has had a significant impact on inmates, limiting social interaction and increasing time spent in cells 4 and yards. Yards are overcrowded, unhygienic, open to the weather, have inad- equate seating and are regularly soiled by birds • Since introduction of the cook-chill method and the new food service, inmates maintain there has been a marked deterioration in the quantity, quality, variety and appearance of food. Dinner portions are smaller, fruit and vegetables lack variety, raw vegetables are scarce, meat is often poor quality and portions are stingy. Meals are frequently floating in water and regularly tepid or cold. The lack of a choice-menu for dinner is out of step with best practice in most modern prisons • The practice of cooking food 48 to 72 hours in advance and re-therming it on the day of consumption is particularly disliked. Inmates believe it is unacceptable to be continuously eating food which is at least two to three days old, and some- times up to a week old • Breakfast meals are inadequate, given the 15-16 hour break between dinner at 4.00 pm and breakfast at 8.00 am. Portion sizes take no account of varying levels of physical activity, there is no choice of cereal, and toast is soggy on delivery • The move from plates to aluminium containers and from metal to plastic utensils is disliked. Concerns exist about the long-term risk of eating out of aluminium, as well as fears about contamination of food. The fact that containers have no divisions to separate food types is also an issue. Plastic utensils are considered impractical and often snap during use • Standard beverages are limited to hot sweet tea, with milk and sugar, leaving those who prefer black unsweetened tea, or coffee, without a choice. • The replacement of week-day hot lunches with sandwiches is unpopular and has contributed to the belief that inmates are getting less food than under the old system. Bread is often stale with no option for multigrain or wholemeal varieties and sandwich fillings need further review • The celebration of festive occasions such as Christmas, Easter and birthdays has diminished over the years. In prison, the significance of such occasions is height- ened, given the degree of isolation inmates feel at these times, and the fact that such events are often associated with particular religious customs, favourite foods and/or family gatherings. • The canteen list offers few healthy food choices and is forever changing, making it an unreliable source for supplementing diets • Concerns about kitchen cleanliness and the personal hygiene of kitchen staff are underpinned by suspicions that unannounced kitchen inspections are a farce, which in turn exacerbates fears about food poisoning 5 • There is a perception that since the introduction of the new food service, the focus on cost-cutting has intensified, to the detriment of inmate needs • Ideally inmates would prefer to prepare and cook their own food or at least have opportunities to do so periodically • No simple straightforward complaints process exists to deal with grievances and the impartiality of the Ombudsman’s office is problematic in the eyes of inmates • The provision of special diets is at best uncertain and at worst non-existent, and the existing process for requesting a special diet is seen as overly bureaucratic and burdensome. Obstructive practices by individual custodial officers delay food and interfere with requests for both medical attention and special diets. • Food is an issue, not simply a way of gaining attention or publicity, and food- related concerns evoke strong emotions, taking their toll on inmate self-esteem as well as prison morale • The process of change to the new food service has not been managed in a way that engages inmates or gives them an ongoing say in decisions about food and eating. In summary, this study found that food matters. ‘What matters is the quality of food on the prisoners’ plates’ and ‘what is required is wholesome food, properly prepared and well presented. It is an essential aspect of having decent conditions in prison’ (Irish Prison Service 2002 : 9). What also matters is diluting a penal cul- ture that appears to ‘rub salt in the wound’ by poor communication and indiffer- ence. 6 INTRODUCTION The idea for this research was triggered by a siege at Risdon Prison in May 2005. The siege ended when a group of inmates were finally appeased by the delivery of fifteen pizzas, a fact many Australians found amusing at the time. However, the centrality of prison food to these events made us curious about the impact of food on the lives of inmates.